Since it's the only thing on television right now, I thought I might as well say something about it. "Mamma-say-mama- sah muh-ma koo-sah- Yee- Hee - Hee!"
Count One: Not Guilty Count Two: Not Gulity Count Three: Not Gulity Count Four: Not Guilty Count Five: Not Guilty Count Six: Not Gulity Count Seven: Not Guilty Count Eight: Not Guilty (at all levels of offense) Count Nine: Not Guilty (at all levels of offense) Count Ten: Not Guilty (at all levels of offense)
"Fuck yourself," said the man who is a heartbeat from the presidency [to Sen. Patrick Leahy] (Washington Post, June 25, 2004)
"I think Howard Dean's over the top..That's not the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party." -- From the obscenity-spewing potty-mouth who is a heartbeat away from the presidency. (Reuters)
What's wrong with the mainstream media? We've been conned by President Bush - the proof is in the Downing Street Memo. The mainstream media gave Bush a pass in 2002 when they should have been investigating and questioning. The mainstream media gives Bush a pass now because they failed to investigate and question. Why should the mainstream's failure to investigate and question be allowed to perpetuate the greatest lie ever told to the American public by their President?
*inspired by Atrios and the smug and unconcerned Michael Kinsley, who is happy to shrug his shoulders in an "I already knew-that" style and tell us that he's not surprised that Bush would fix intelligence and facts to fit a desired policy. This is the same Michael Kinsley who said, back in 2003, that the debate about WMD’s existence was always really academic, and that most people had moved on even though the WMD was never found. He was weak then, and I think that's why he's weak now. I suggest, when the military draft is reinstituted (don't kid yourself, it's coming, and middle class boys (and girls) are being sent to Iraq, the tune and the public mood will change, even if Kinsley's attitude doesn't.
The mainstream media cannot bury this sizzler of a story underneath their "Mean Howard Dean" and "Michael Jackson Trial" stories -- unless they wish to relinquish all claims to being 'investigative journalists' and leave it to the bloggers.
Raw Story is reporting that six new British documents reveal details on the case for the Iraq war quoted in the UK press but never printed raw; A longer narrative will be available later today.
The Iraq options paper (Raw Story) - Jack Straw indicates the case for war was weak; that the Iraq situation had remained unchanged; and that the United States would not have gone to war without September 11.
Raw Story: A memo from Christopher Meyer, British ambassador to the US from 1997 through February 2003, and dated in March of 2002. Strikingly, the document speaks of a "need to wrongfoot Saddam on the inspectors" and suggests British intelligence and diplomacy draws a great deal on articles written by Sy Hersh in the New Yorker. It also describes a meeting with then-Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz.
Sunday Times Online: UK PAPER TELLS OF 2002 NEED FOR WAR 'EXCUSE'- Read the secret doc: Make conditions for the Iraq war. The document said the only way the allies could justify military action was to place Saddam Hussein in a position where he ignored or rejected a United Nations ultimatum ordering him to co-operate with the weapons inspectors.
A refusal [by Iraq] to admit UN inspectors, or their admission and subsequent likely frustration, which resulted in an appropriate finding by the Security Council could provide the justification for military action....sensitising the public: a media campaign to warn off the dangers that Saddam poses and to prepare public opinion both in the UK and abroad....The US should be encouraged to consult widely on its plans..."
"The seeping of blogistan into the pages of the Times of London with regard to its own scoops seems to me a bellwether of the kinds of changes that are being produced in our information environment by the blogging phenomenon. The gatekeepers at the New York Times and the Washington Post can no longer decide whether a leak is a story or a non-story. The public decides what a story is."
Ruth Conniff (political editor of The Progressive): "Making sure that people see the facts, and hammering home the point that the lies we were told led us to the mess we're in now, has got to be part of the solution."